Reading the Detectives discussion

Enjoy all your spoilers here

Sorry to be the first to comment, but I am 72 and don't want to forget what I thought. So sad--decline of Styles paralleling decline of Poirot's body. Somehow we keep thinking he would go on forever.

It really does a good job of depicting the evil words can do and how basically good people can be manipulated into doing what is normally unthinkable to them. Yet, what is it about human nature that makes us believe the worst about each other, even though we are being manipulated? I would like to think I would at least give my loved one a chance to affirm or deny what I may have seen or heard. Perhaps, as shown here, what I think I see or hear might be wrong.

The ending bothers me since I can't reconcile Poirot and murder, regardless of his reasons.

I agree, this was a poignant read as we see Poirot reaching the end of his life, and coming up against someone instigating murders that he could see no way of stopping.

I think the idea of using words to incite others to commit acts of violence is particularly timely, and a worthwhile reminder that we all have that potential to be driven to do things we couldn't imagine doing before being brought under that malign influence. Given that this was apparently written in the 1940's, I wonder if the events of WW II might have been fresh in Christie's mind.

Nonetheless, I found the beliefs voiced by Judith and others around Euthanasia and getting rid of "useless people" to be incredible-I can't imagine her-someone brought up by Hastings and no doubt raised with at least some minimal religious teaching and doctrine-could ever come to espouse those sorts of beliefs, or at least to voice them in company. Also, I can't really believe that Hastings would ever be driven to murder to protect his daughter's virtue.

Ultimately, I found this a satisfying closing to our chronological reading of Poirot's adventures. I am somewhat sorry, given that Christie apparently wrote these to prevent Poirot living on beyond her, that her estate did give someone the right to write a continuation of his story.

I agree with both Chris and Frances - and Frances you’re absolutely right about the timeliness of manipulating others to do your bidding through words! I agree, WWII might have been fresh in Christie’s mind.

I was also shocked by Judith’s comments with my modern mindset, but I have learned through various historical books and documentaries that the eugenics movement, of which Judith appears to be a proponent, had a wide following in the years before WWII - it was even enshrined in our laws, which allowed sterilization of those deemed undesirable for reproduction for decades, shocking as it sounds today.

I find Judith's attitude to euthanasia of the weak strange for its time. For us - and I would have thought even then for Christie - such a culling would be associated with the Nazis, although eugenics itself was more a cause for the left wing (The Guardian, for example, supported it in the 20s). I could see Judith and John Franklin being like Sidney and Beatrice Webb - socialist supporters of the eugenics movement. But by the time Christie wrote Curtain the mood surely had changed. Or perhaps it did not change until the War ended and the camps were liberated.

I dislike Judith altogether. She was rude, snobbish, opinionated (in the worst sort of way), and treated her dear father horribly. I could understand her rebellious attitude in a teenager, but coming from a young woman of 21 who is supposed to be a budding scientist, it was rather off-putting.
One does wonder in terms of her attitudes towards euthanasia, how much of that was her own beliefs, and how much was it parroting Dr. Franklin, who she was both in love with and also admired and respected professionally? If she was suspectible to Norton's manipulations, she might also be open to suggestions from other quarters as well. And unfortunately, the idea of population control is still being propounded today from some in the scientific community, all in the name of environmental concerns. Sadly those types of ideas never seem to die.

I found this a really touching end to Poirot's and Hasting's relationship. In my opinion Hasting was the lead character. It was his mourning for his wife, frustrated love for his daughter and sorrow over Poirot feebleness that I remember.

Unlike an earlier comment I can see Poirot killing a murderer when there is no other way, especially when he, Poirot, has not long to live and will not be convicted for it. He was quite willing to allow murderers to commit suicide to avoid trial.

I liked the touch that even at the point of murder Poirot would not accept something as unbalanced as a shot to the temple but insisted on the exact center of the forehead.

That was so Poirot!

I was absolutely shocked by the turn of events. I found myself saying "Oh no, what?! You got to be kidding" aloud multiple times from chapter 18 on.

What I find most strange is that Poirot would make himself look more fragile and weak, it's a very long ploy to catch his suspect. Of course he has taken matters into his own hands before, most notably in Murder on the Orient Express but also with the Countess and the The Nemean Lion (that was also really strange I thought). The questions troubling me here are shouldn't Poirot have become better than the murderers he has brought to justice all those years, or is he just human? Is he a villain or a hero?

Poirot’s last actions were to write the explanation and await his death. It is unclear to me if he feels any remorse for again playing on the gullibility of his friend Hastings or for turning into that what he always fought in others. Perhaps he does as he neglects to take his heart medication to accelerate his own passing.

In any case, the final chapters took me breath away. We have now read all the words Agatha wrote about Poirot and this last book does them all justice.

I think what irritated me most about Curtain wasn't that Poirot decided that the man he had identified as a serial killer should be murdered by him, since there was no legal way of bringing an end to his killings, but that having become satisfied that X was guilty, and gone to all the trouble of setting up his weakened persona, and the business with the keys etc, he should then delay so much that another person died, and there might have been at least three more 'victims' and their victims - (view spoiler)[, the Colonel and his wife, Judith and Mrs Franklin, Hastings and Allerton, and of course Dr Franklin (hide spoiler)].

Jessica wrote: "I was absolutely shocked by the turn of events. I found myself saying "Oh no, what?! You got to be kidding" aloud multiple times from chapter 18 on.

What I find most strange is that Poirot would ..."

Yes, my reaction and questions remain similar - I enjoyed this more than I thought I would knowing, what would happen and dreading it! But I was amazed at Christie’s writing skill, how it has stayed with me, how powerful it was - from Hastings pain and sorrow over his wife and oldest, dearest friend, to Poirot’s decline, his unusual temper toward Hastings (couldn’t recall seeing him lose his cool so much- now I think it shows his torment and frustration at his own helplessness, choices he felt he had to make). All the while, she was giving the reader all that very real human angst, she was feinting and leading us first one way, then another, with a devilishly clever puzzle where it seemed a couple different people could have been the killer.

Amazing book, I thought, and very fitting final tribute.

Well said, everyone and a special thank you to Jessica for kickstarting this great read!

Rosina wrote: "I think what irritated me most about Curtain wasn't that Poirot decided that the man he had identified as a serial killer should be murdered by him, since there was no legal way of bringing an end ..."

Good point, I honestly forgot about that - I wonder, did he think he and Hastings could change the course of events, catch the killer sooner, or did the ending become inevitable, a “worst case plan B”, if you will, that Poirot put into action once he realized it was the only way? If so, he mustn’t have had much faith in himself and Hastings- he sent George away and hired the more biddable servant very early on, just in case he had to carry out the “worst-case” ending. I can’t imagine his torment- especially as a Catholic and someone who always proclaimed he did not “approve” of murder! And then to stop his medicine intentionally, basically, suicide - another mortal sin.

Frances wrote: "Well said, everyone and a special thank you to Jessica for kickstarting this great read!"

Yes! I enjoyed it so very much, a lot of these later Poirot mysteries were new to me, or I had only seen them on Telly with Suchet, or I had read them once, and so long ago, they were like new reads! Thanks so much for the wonderful discussions, everyone - especially in this pandemic, our virtual worldwide book clubs allowed us to still share our love of reading and figuring out whodunnit!

What an ending to a great journey through the Poirot books! I was suspicious of Poirot, but didn't suspect Norton. I agree with the comments about Judith, she was horrible and very much unlike Hastings.

I audibly gasped when I read that Poirot wore a false moustache. Surely it wasn't a fake throughout the series? Or did I completely miss that?

Tracey wrote: "What an ending to a great journey through the Poirot books! I was suspicious of Poirot, but didn't suspect Norton. I agree with the comments about Judith, she was horrible and very much unlike Hast..."

I got the impression it was a fake in more recent times, although I'm not clear whether that was due to health issues, or a very long game on his part to allow him to impersonate X. It was definitely a fake in the Suchet series though, and looked it, IMO, in the later seasons when they changed its look.

Good idea about the long game, that sounds like a very Poirot thing to do. I've never actually watched any of the Suchet series, now we've read them all, maybe I can delve into to this for my Poirot fix!

I'm planning to satisfy my Poirot fix by reading Poirot and Me.

Sandy wrote: "I'm planning to satisfy my Poirot fix by reading Poirot and Me."

Interesting! Another one added to the TBR ;-)

Tracey wrote: "Good idea about the long game, that sounds like a very Poirot thing to do. I've never actually watched any of the Suchet series, now we've read them all, maybe I can delve into to this for my Poiro..."

Its actually a fun exercise to watch the adaptations right after finishing the book, just to see the similarities and differences. The early Suchets (which are mostly the short stories), are particularly good.